IJSTR

International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research

IJSTR@Facebook IJSTR@Twitter IJSTR@Linkedin
Home About Us Scope Editorial Board Blog/Latest News Contact Us
CALL FOR PAPERS
AUTHORS
DOWNLOADS
CONTACT
QR CODE
IJSTR-QR Code

IJSTR >> Volume 1 - Issue 8, September 2012 Edition



International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research  
International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research

Website: http://www.ijstr.org

ISSN 2277-8616



Influence of Electrical Field Interation on Speech Recognition Performance of Cochlear Implant Users: Adults With Prelingual Deafness

[Full Text]

 

AUTHOR(S)

Goutam Goyal, M. E., Dr. K. K. Dhawan, Dr. S. S. Tiwari

 

KEYWORDS

 

ABSTRACT

Abstract:- To examine the hypothesis that the newer generations of cochlear implants could provide considerable speech understanding to late-implanted, prelingually deaf adult patients. Cochlear implant (CI) user's performance degrades significantly in noisy environments, especially in non-steady noisy conditions.Unlike normal hearing listeners. CI users generally perform better when listening to speech in steady-state noise than in fluctuating maskers, and the reasons for that are unclear. In this article, we propose a new hypothesis for the observed absence of release from masking by CI users. A new strategy is also developed and integrated into existing CI systems to improve speech recognition in noise for CI users.

 

REFERENCES

[1] Dorman MF. Speech perception by adults. Presented at the NIH Consensus Development Conference on Cochlear Implants in Adults and Children, Bethesda, Maryland, 1995;61–62.

[2] Waltzman SB, Cohen NL. Cochlear implantation in children younger than two years old. Am J Otol 1998;19:158–162.

[3] Fryauf-Bertschy H, Tyler RS, Kelsay DM, et al. Cochlear implant use by prelingually deafened children: the influences of age at implant and length of device use. J Speech Lang Hear Res 1997;40:183–199.

[4] Manrique M, Cervera-Paz FJ, Huarte A, et al. Cerebral auditory plasticity and cochlear implants. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 1999;49(Suppl 1):S193–S197.

[5] Svirsky MA, Robbins AM, Kirk KI, et al. Language development in profoundly deaf children with cochlear implants. Psych Sci 2000;11:153–158.

[6] Waltzman SB, Cohen NL, Shapiro WH. Use of multichannel cochlear implant in the congenitally and prelingually deaf population. Laryngoscope 1992;102:395–399.

[7] Skinner MW, Binzer SM, Fears BT, et al. Study of the performance of four prelinguistically or perilinguistically deaf patients with a multi-electrode, intracochlear implant. Laryngoscope 1992;102:797–806.

[8] Sarant JZ, Cowan RS, Blamey PJ, et al. Cochlear implants for congenitally deaf adolescents: is open-set speech perception a realistic expectation? Ear Hear 1994;15:400–403.

[9] Waltzman SB, Cohen NL. Implantation of patients with prelingual long-term deafness. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1999;108:84–87.

[10] Waltzman SB, Roland JT, Cohen NL. Delayed implantation in congenitally deaf children and adults. Otol Neurotol 2002;23:333–340.

[11] Schramm D, Fitzpatrick E, Seguin C. Cochlear implantation for adolescents and adults with prelinguistic deafness. Otol Neurotol 2002;23:698–703.

[12] Clark GM, Busby PA, Roberts SA, et al. Preliminary results for the cochlear corporation multielectrode intracochlear implant in six prelingually deaf patients. Am J Otol 1987; 8:234–239.

[13] Snik AF, Makhdoum MJ, Vermeulen AM, et al. The relation between age at the time of cochlear implantation and longterm speech perception abilities in congenitally deaf subjects. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 1997;41:121–131.

[14] Snik AF, Vermeulen AM, Brokx JP, et al. Speech perception performance of children with a cochlear implant compared to that of children with conventional hearing aids. I. The “equivalent hearing loss” concept. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockh) 1997;117:750–754.

[15] Osberger MJ, Fisher L, Zimmerman-Phillips S, et al. Speech recognition performance of older children with cochlear implants. Am J Otol 1998;19:152–157.

[16] C. Wei, and K. Cao. Speech recognition with amplitude and frequency modula-tions. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA, 102:2293–2298, 2005.

[17] F-G. Zeng and C. W. Turner. Recognition of voiceless fricatives by normal and hearing-impaired subjects. J. Speech Hear. Res., 33:440–449, 1990.

[18] Aitkin, L (1990). The auditory cortex, (Chapman and Hall, London). Abbas, PJ (1993). “Electrophysiology,” in Cochlear Implants: Audiological foundations, edited by RS Tyler, (Singular Publishing, San Diego), pp. 317-355.

[19] Armstrong-Bednall, G, Goodrum-Clarke, K, Stollwerck, L, Nunn, T, Wei, J, Boyle, P (1999). “Clarion paired pulsatile sampler (PPS): User preference and performance,” Presented at the 1999 Conference on Implantable Auditory Prostheses, Pacific Grove, CA.

[20] Battmer, RD, Gnadeberg D, von Wallenberg E, (1993). “A study of monopolar and bipolar stimulation modes with a modified Nucleus mini-22 cochlear implant,” Adv Otorhinolaryngol 48, 9-16.

[21] Battmer, RD, Zilberman, Y, Haake, P, Lenarz, T (1999). “Simultaneous Analog Stimulation (SAS) – Continuous Interleaved Sampler (CIS) pilot comparison study in Europe,” Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 108, 69-73.

[22] Battmer, RD, Goldring, JE, Kuzma, J, Lenarz, T (2000a). “New CLARION Hi-Focus Intracochlear Electrode: Long-term clinical results,” Presented at The 6th International Cochlear Implant Conference. Miami Beach, FL.

[23] Battmer, RD, Goldring, JE, Kuzma, J,Lenarz, T (2000b). “Intraoperative measures and post-operative clinical results with new modiolus hugging electrodes and simultaneous analog stimulation (SAS) in young children,” Presented at The 6th International Cochlear Implant Conference. Miami Beach, FL.

[24] Berliner, KI and Eisenberg, LS (1987). “Our experience with cochlear implants: have we erred in our expectations?,” Am J Otol 8, 222-229.

[25] Berliner, KI, Tonokawa, LL, and Dye, LM, et al (1989a). “Open-set speech recognition in children with a single-channel cochlear implant.”, Ear Hear 10, 237-242.

[26] Berliner, KI, House, WF, Tonokawa, LL (1989b). “Open-set speech recognition by children with a single-channel cochlear implant,”, Trans Am Otol Soc, 50.

[27] Boex, C, de Balthasar, C, and Pelizzone, M (1999). “Electrode interactions in Clarion subjects,” Presented at the 1999 Conference on Implantable Auditory Prostheses, Pacific Grove, CA.

[28] Boex, C, Pelizzone, M, and Montandon, P (1996). “Speech recognition with a CIS strategy for the Ineraid multichannel cochlear implant,” Am. J. Otol. 17, 61-68.

[29] Boothroyd, A., Mulhearn, B., Gong., J., and Ostroff, J. (1996). “Effects of spectral smearing on phoneme and word recognition,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 100, 1807-1818.

[30] Boyd, PJ and Brill, S (2000). “Psychoacoustic measures of electrical threshold interactions in the CIS strategy,” Presented at The 6th International Cochlear Implant Conference. Miami Beach, FL